Video: Glenn Beck buries the two-party system — almost
posted at 6:57 pm on November 23, 2009 by Allahpundit
Another bit o’ data for my debate with Ace over whether Beck’s serious about independent/third-party challenges or just trying to scare the GOP into tacking right. I’d say this clip is a point in his favor, the coffin metaphor notwithstanding. GB does seem to be saying it’s not too late for the party to repent, although I wish he’d knock it off with the disingenuously nonpartisan “I’ll vote for the Democrats if they turn libertarian too” nonsense. That’s like saying you’ll become Catholic if the Church renounces the Bible. His message is aimed at one party only and every last one of his viewers knows it.
Exit question per this weekend’s announcement of “The Plan”: If Barack Obama announced education “conferences” (purely voluntary) to teach people the joys of statism and benevolent government, how many weeks of material would GB get out of it? Eight? 10?
Update: Commenters are already objecting to the hypothetical on grounds that Obama’s megaphone as president is so much bigger than Beck’s. Fair enough, although I can’t think of a media figure on the left who’s quite equivalent to Beck (or Rush, for that matter) in stature. Maybe … Oprah? She seems not quite political enough. How about Gore or Bill Clinton? Beck would object that they’re eminent former government officials while he’s just a “rodeo clown” (who’s, um, planning his own March on Washington), but you could argue that these days he has more influence over the right’s base than they do over the left’s.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
It’s where the “Democrats and Republicans are all the same” complaint leads.
pearson on November 23, 2009 at 11:21 PM
Thank you Both, for bringing some sanity back to this thread!
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on November 23, 2009 at 11:28 PM
This has Cloward/Piven strategy written all over it. One day the dots will be connected and Bush will be vindicated.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sxz6gYIiFHc
redridinghood on November 23, 2009 at 11:29 PM
This headline is just plain wrong. He is not trying to bury the two-party system. He is trying to wake up the 2 parties. He is trying to ask the democrats if the democratic party is the party of their parents and/or grandparents. Obviously, its not.
I’ve never heard him say that he advocates a 3rd party. He is just trying to get the people to wake up and become more involved.
Mirimichi on November 23, 2009 at 11:35 PM
Hmm, that is possibility and Soros has done that type of thing before.
AIG was a bank and an insurance co, but they have since sold the bank to the Saudis. Clinton did this right b4 he left office
http://www.allbusiness.com/business-finance/business-insurance/781530-1.html
njpat on November 23, 2009 at 11:48 PM
Really? Democrats and Republicans currently use fear of the other party to hold their power. ‘If you don’t vote for me, the other guy from the evil party will get elected’
THAT is what needs to stop and both parties do it.
TechieNotTrekkie on November 24, 2009 at 12:03 AM
Interesting.
Even when the Dems have most of the MSM & print media pimping their propaganda it is still becoming more & more apparent that they are in bed with the devil and the stench of their corruption is noxious.
redridinghood on November 24, 2009 at 12:24 AM
Allah, you sadden me.
You recognize that the metaphor is not appropriate, but then you try to force it with the “big megaphone” angle.
Beck may have a big megaphone, but it’s not as big as the White House one. The Beck megaphone isn’t backed up with the force of the federal government.
Apples and lunar capsules.
Jason Coleman on November 24, 2009 at 12:39 AM
To all those saying that 3rd parties don’t work, I’m curious…. Does no one remember their American History classes from high school besides me?
What were the 2 major parties in 1787?
The WHIGS and the Democrats.
Who?
Yeah. . . .The Republicans *ARE* a 3rd party which rose to prominence in the 1840′s and 1850′s with Lincoln being elected as a Republican giving a huge boost of legitimacy for the party.
That said, I don’t think advocating for a 3rd party at this time is useful in any way, and I totally agree that GB should stop flirting with the idea of advocating for one as he sometimes seems to be doing. If he were less ambiguous in his statements about wanting the parties to clean up their corruption and getting back to representing the people instead of their own butts as congresscritters that it would go a long way toward reassuring many people.
Magson on November 24, 2009 at 1:07 AM
TechieNotTrekkie on November 24, 2009 at 12:03 AM
Rush has said the same thing…when he tells Republicans you have to give something to vote FOR, instead of relying on the votes against. Where Beck is more edgy than Rush, is Rush says bloody up our guys in the primary, and Beck is willing to do it in the general.
It annoys me to no end when people are so focused on the 2012 Presidential race, and are willing to sell their soul for it. Fact is Obama would have no power if Congress and governors and state legislators and mayors and city councils were run by principled people who understand and firmly believe in the constitution.
Conservative Voice on November 24, 2009 at 1:10 AM
This is mind blowing. I never heard this until now. Is it backed up by other sources? This is a good source (CSPAN) even if its a Democrat.
11 Sept 2008 550 Billion dollars was taken out of Money Market in ONE hour. The Fed Shut it down, and says that if it did not the US Economy was collapsing.
What happen on 11 Sept 2008? 9/11? was this real or a cyber attack? Did people figure out on that day that Obama was winning and the economy will continue to get worse? This needs more follow up.
Ed Laskie on November 24, 2009 at 3:17 AM
I’ve never voted for a “Demorat” and I haven’t rally voted for a Republican for President since Reagan, basically because they haven’t nominated anyone that wasn’t a fraud or a liar and I basically cast a vote for Palin hoping McShamnesty would die in office.
No I’m not joking.
nelsonknows on November 24, 2009 at 3:19 AM
Y’know, there actually are some conservative/libertarian-ish democrats – a rare few. Jim Webb comes to mind.
CPL 310 on November 24, 2009 at 5:48 AM
Yeah, that’s the story as told by Paulson & Bernanke to Congress. It wasn’t a cyber-attack, the word had gotten out that Lehman was going to devastate the Reserve Fund, a huge money market fund, and was going to drive it to below $1 value, or “break the buck”, which did happen on the 16th. You always hear about the mythical “money on the sidelines”, right? Well – this was a tsunami of money past the sidelines and into the shower. Allah covered the Kanjorski CSPAN appearance, but you should read and learn to understand ZeroHedge.
rhodeymark on November 24, 2009 at 5:59 AM
If it wasn`t for a 3rd party (Ross Perot), Bill Clinton would not have been President.
A 3rd Party with a conservative platform is a gift to the Democrats that does not stop giving.
albill on November 24, 2009 at 6:32 AM
I’m a Libertarian as is Glenn Beck, but will vote Republican again to rid the country of a commie in the White House. I’d like to see a Libertarian run as a Republican, someone that used to be Republican. Read Wayne Allen Root’s “Conscience of a Libertarian” and see if that’s not the country you want. Beats this psuedo-Communist regime we have in the White House now….
adamsmith on November 24, 2009 at 7:27 AM
“Commenters are already objecting to the hypothetical on grounds that Obama’s megaphone as president is so much bigger than Beck’s. Fair enough, although I can’t think of a media figure on the left who’s quite equivalent to Beck (or Rush, for that matter) in stature.”
When was the last time Beck or Rush had their show on 5 networks. It’s called a “bully pulpit” for a reason. Get a clue.
gitarfan on November 24, 2009 at 8:01 AM
The party won’t but individual candidates can and do.
MarkTheGreat on November 24, 2009 at 8:21 AM
You guys are missing his point. It’s not about parties, it’s about values. What good is voting for a party that says they share your values then backs someone like Dede Scousafazza.
After the last election, I finally accepted someothing. I rather vote for someone who shares my values than vote for someone who says they do and then doesn’t. I’d feel better if I lost and election voting with my head as opposed to voting with my party. Elections shouldn’t be about picking between the lesser of two evils, it should be voting for the people who share you values and beliefs. It’s should be your voice, not your party’s.
Haven’t you learned anything? Remember Doug Hoffmann?
Pcoop on November 24, 2009 at 8:23 AM
Let the left start their own party and we can take back our party.
darwin-t on November 24, 2009 at 8:41 AM
You know, I just watched that segment (it is on Fox News’s video player under Shows\Glenn Beck\One Thing 11-23) and it is about the corruption and the overspending in BOTH parties. And in that sense, GB is right. The only difference is the speed that they are taking us over the edge of oblivion.
Wolftech on November 24, 2009 at 10:07 AM
Magson, you must received one of those public school history lessons. I like what you are trying to say, but your argument will be lost unless you have your historical facts correct.
The two parties in 1787 were the Federalists and the Democratic-Republican party. Although George Washington despised political parties, he is commonly associated with the Federalist party along with John Adams and Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson and many other founders were members of the Democratic-Republican party.
As time went on, the Federalist party began to die out and this country was mostly a single party system until the mid-1820′s where there was a split in the Democratic-Republican party over idealogical issues. The Democratic-Republican party split into the Democrat and Whig party. Andrew Jackson was the first Democrat elected president.
These two parties dominated the political landscape until the mid-1850′s when the Whig party had and idealogical split because many of the abolitionists in the party felt that the Whigs were not doing enough to fight for the end of slavery. Thus the Republican party was created and the Whig party shortly died.
From this point forward, our political landscape of Democrats and Republicans was started.
So yes, your argument about 3rd parties have worked in the past is correct, but because you state “Does no one remember their American History classes…” and then get the history incorrect diminishes your message.
DoS_Conservative on November 24, 2009 at 10:49 AM
Who???
right2bright on November 24, 2009 at 12:09 PM
Not to mention that that was over 150 years ago. I’m not sure I want to base a strategy on something that hasn’t worked in over 150 years. People win the Powerball drawing too, but I wouldn’t recommend playing the lottery as a means of earning a living.
xblade on November 24, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Personally, I think the odds are greater. I would prefer death as a free man as opposed to living as a slave.
I also think, in general, freedom scares people. Personal risk is involved and it requires involvement to maintain. But the pay-off is amazing.
AZ_Redneck on November 24, 2009 at 1:04 PM
Get rid of the primary ‘winner take all’ some states have.
I think the problem would then be a lot more solvable.
Badger40 on November 24, 2009 at 1:24 PM
You’re absolutely right! Keep on with the 3rd party idea, instead of getting rid of Steele and all the so called Republican moderates and the Dems will be guaranteed a win in 2010 and 2012.
Hobbes on November 24, 2009 at 1:27 PM
That’s why I voted McCain, too.
We got lucky with Reagan bcs he was a principled, good man.
None of the ones since then have been.
GHB I believe is a good man at heart, but has some wrong ideas about our govt.
And BO-he’s an outright socialist bordering on blatant communism IMHO.
I’ve read so much on Stalin, Mao & Hitler in the last few years my head is exploding bcs they have so much in common & yet no one sees it.
Yikes.
Badger40 on November 24, 2009 at 1:30 PM
I think we need to focus more on Congress & who gets in there rather than POTUS.
Perhaps party affiliation does not matter as much there.
I personally vote for democrats on the local level when I know them & their platform.
Locally, I always vote for the best guy, no matter what the party is.
Badger40 on November 24, 2009 at 1:33 PM
Forget 2012 for now, we need to focus on 2010. We don’t need a third party, what we need is a coalition of Independent conservatives, Tea Partiers, to run against Democrats in those districts where the Republicans have had no success. Rural and suburban, mostly Midwest to Northeast, more conservative than their Democrat rep but not willing to vote Republican. Time to clean House – FireFifty.
motionview on November 24, 2009 at 1:45 PM
@DoS_Conservative
Thanks for correcting my mis-knowledge. And for hopefully edumacating everyone else around here even more.
Gonna list the 12 presidents we had before George Washington now? (This one I *didn’t* learn in Amer History class. . . )
Magson on November 24, 2009 at 3:19 PM
Yeah, that has worked for the school system…and it’s worked for California…
right2bright on November 24, 2009 at 4:37 PM
I’m remembering a line from “Good Morning, Vietnam”… something about having a more dire need than any white man in history…
I’m sure I’ll think of it in a moment.
VekTor on November 24, 2009 at 7:50 PM
User has removed video
hamradio on November 24, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3